HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 20352 of 2025 Court No. - 42 HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR BIRLA, J. HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri G.P. Singh learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of F.I.R. dated 22.06.2025registered as Case Crime No. 195 of 202, under Sections 376, 384, 504, 506 IPC and Section 67 of Information Technology Act, Police Station Karchhana, District Prayagraj. Further prayer has been made not to arrest the petitioner in the aforesaid case. 3. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the present criminal prosecution has been lodged with absolutely mala fide intention/reasons levelling false allegations against the petitioner whereas the petitioner himself is a victim and huge amount was transferred by him in the account of the alleged victim. It was pointed out that two other co- accused who are sister and brother-in-law of the petitioner have been granted indulgence by this court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17457 of 2025 (Smt. Jyoti Mishra Vs. State of U.P.) and Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 171474 of 2025 (Sameer Kumar Shukla vs. State of U.P.) passed on 19.8.2025. 4. Per contral, learned A.G.A. submits that the petitioner herein Ashish Mishra is the main accused and the interim order was granted to Jyoti Misrha only on the ground that she is the sister of the main accused Ashish Mishra and has been falsely roped in the case by the informant. On the same ground interim protection was granted to her husband Sameer Kumar Shukla. Learned A.G.A. pointed out that the charge sheet has already been submitted against both of them and the petitioner herein who is the main accused is absconding. He has pointed out that charge sheet No. 151 of 2025 was forwarded on 20.8.2025 against co-accused Jtoti Mishra and Shameer Kumar Shukla who were granted interim indulgence as noted above and said protection is no longer available to the petitioner who infact is the main accused. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Pradeep Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Ashish Kumar Mishra .....Petitioner(s) The State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. We find substance in the the argument of learned A.G.A. further there can be no part quashing of the first information report in the present case particularly in view of the fact that the petitioner herein is the main accused and other co-accused have been granted indulgence only on the ground that Jyoti Mishra, sister of the main accused, and Sameer Kumar Shukla is husband of the sister. 6. Perusal of the impugned first information report prima facie reveals commission of cognizable offence. 7. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335 and M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918 and in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.3262/2021 (Leelavati Devi @ Leelawati & another vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh) decided on 07.10.2021, no case has been made out for interference with the impugned first information report. 8. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. September 11, 2025 Kumar Manish CRLP No. 20352 of 2025 2 (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) (Vivek Kumar Birla,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad